Physiologically based absorption modeling to predict the bioequivalence of two apixaban formulations.

The equivalence of absorption rates and extents between generic drugs and their reference formulations is crucial for ensuring therapeutic comparability. Bioequivalence (BE) studies are widely utilized and play a pivotal role in substantiating the approval and promotional efforts for generic drugs. Virtual BE simulation is a valuable tool for mitigating risks and guiding clinical BE studies, thereby minimizing redundant in vivo BE assessments. Herein, we successfully developed a physiologically based absorption model for virtual BE simulations, which precisely predicts the BE of the apixaban test and reference formulations. The modeling results confirm that the test and reference formulations were bioequivalent under both fasted and fed conditions, consistent with clinical studies. This highlights the efficacy of physiologically based absorption modeling as a powerful tool for formulation screening and can be adopted as a methodological and risk assessment strategy to detect potential clinical BE risks.

In Vitro In Vivo Extrapolation and Bioequivalence Prediction for Immediate-Release Capsules of Cefadroxil Based on a Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic ACAT Model.

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling is a mechanistic concept, which helps to judge the effects of biopharmceutical properties of drug product such as in vitro dissolution on its pharmacokinetic and in vivo performance. With the application of virtual bioequivalence (VBE) study, the drug product development using model-based approach can help in evaluating the possibility of extending BCS-based biowaiver. Therefore, the current study was intended to develop PBPK model as well as in vitro in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) for BCS class III drug i.e. cefadroxil. A PBPK model was created in GastroPlus™ 9.8.3 utilizing clinical data of immediate-release cefadroxil formulations. By the examination of simulated and observed plasma drug concentration profiles, the predictability of the proposed model was assessed for the prediction errors. Furthermore, mechanistic deconvolution was used to create IVIVE, and the plasma drug concentration profiles and pharmacokinetic parameters were predicted for different virtual formulations with variable cefadroxil in vitro release. Virtual bioequivalence study was also executed to assess the bioequivalence of the generic verses the reference drug product (Duricef®). The developed PBPK model satisfactorily predicted Cmax and AUC0-t after cefadroxil single and multiple oral dose administrations, with all individual prediction errors within the limits except in a few cases. Second order polynomial correlation function obtained accurately predict in vivo drug release and plasma concentration profile of cefadroxil test and reference (Duricef®) formulation. The VBE study also proved test formulation bioequivalent to reference formulation and the statistical analysis on pharmacokinetic parameters reported 90% confidence interval for Cmax and AUC0-t in the FDA acceptable limits. The analysis found that a validated and verified PBPK model with a mechanistic background is as a suitable approach to accelerate generic drug development.

Evaluation of Biological Equivalence for Generic Tulathromycin Injections in Cattle.

The recent expiration of patents for the antibiotic tulathromycin has led to a significant increase in the number of generic tulathromycin products (GTPs) available. This study aims to evaluate the bioequivalence of four GTPs, which experienced a rapid increase in market share. The bioequivalence was evaluated by performing pharmacokinetic assessments. The four selected GTPs (Tulaject, Tulagen, Toulashot, and T-raxxin) were compared with the reference product, Draxxin. A dose of 2.5 mg/kg.bw/day was administered via subcutaneous injection, and blood samples were collected 460 times from 20 Holstein cattle. Plasma concentrations of tulathromycin were measured over time using LC-MS/MS analysis. Bioequivalence was evaluated using a statistical program for pharmacokinetic parameters, including the area under the concentration time curve (AUC) and the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax). The bioequivalence was considered proven if the difference between the test and reference products was within 20% for both AUC and Cmax. The results showed that the confidence interval (CI, 90%) for both AUC and Cmax values was within the 80~120% range, demonstrating the bioequivalence of the four GTPs compared to Draxxin. This study provides evidence for the bioequivalence of the selected GTPs, contributing to their validation for use as effective antibiotics.

Bioequivalence Evaluation of Topical Metronidazole Products Using Dermal Microdialysis in New Zealand Rabbits.

Comparative assessment of cutaneous pharmacokinetics (cPK) by dermal microdialysis (dMD) appears to be suitable to evaluate the bioequivalence (BE) of topical dermatological drug products applied to the skin (TDDPs). Although dMD studies in the literature have reported inconclusive BE assessments, we have addressed several methodological deficiencies to improve dMD's capability to assess BE between reference (R) and approved generic (referred to as test (T)) gel and cream products of metronidazole (MTZ). The 90% confidence interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratios for the Ln(AUC0-24) and Ln(Cmax) endpoints was centered within the BE limits of 80-125%. The CIs extended outside this range as the proof-of-principle study was not statistically powered to demonstrate BE (N = 7 rabbits). A power analysis suggests that, with the variability observed in this study, 21 rabbits for the cream and 11 rabbits for the gel would be sufficient to support an evaluation of BE with the 2 probe replicates we used, and only 10 and 5 rabbits would be sufficient to power the study for the cream and gel, respectively, if 4 probe replicates are used for each treatment per rabbit. These results indicate that dMD when properly controlling variables can be used to support BE assessments for TDDPs.

Biopharmaceutics Risk Assessment-Connecting Critical Bioavailability Attributes with In Vitro, In Vivo Properties and Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling to Enable Generic Regulatory Submissions.

Quality risk assessment following ICH Q9 principles is an important activity to ensure optimal clinical efficacy and safety of a drug product. Typically, risk assessment is focused on product performance wherein critical material attributes, formulation variables, and process parameters are evaluated from a manufacturing perspective. Extending ICH Q9 principles to biopharmaceutics risk assessment to identify factors that can impact in vivo performance is an upcoming area. This is evident by recent regulatory trends wherein a new term critical bioavailability attributes (CBA) has been coined to identify such factors. Although significant work has been performed for biopharmaceutics risk assessment for new molecules, there is a need for harmonized biopharmaceutics risk assessment workflow for generic submissions. In this manuscript, we attempted to provide a framework for performing biopharmaceutics risk assessment for generic regulatory submissions. A detailed workflow for performing biopharmaceutics risk assessment includes identification of initial CBA (iCBA), their confirmatory evaluation followed by definition of the control strategy. Tools for biopharmaceutics risk assessment, i.e., bio-discriminatory dissolution method and physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling (PBBM) were discussed from a practical perspective. Furthermore, a case study for CBA evaluation using PBBM modeling for an extended-release product for regulatory submission has been described using the proposed workflow. Finally, future directions of integrating CBA evaluation, biopharmaceutics risk assessment to the FDA Knowledge Aided Structured Assessment (KASA) initiative, the necessity of risk assessment templates, and knowledge sharing between industry and academia are discussed. Overall, the work described in this manuscript can facilitate and provide guidance for biopharmaceutics risk assessment for generic submissions.

A single-dose, randomized crossover study in healthy Chinese subjects to evaluate pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of two capsules of calcium dobesilate 0.5 g under fasting and fed conditions.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the rate and extent of absorption of a launched generic calcium dobesilate capsule versus the branded reference formulation under fasting and fed conditions in healthy Chinese subjects, and to assess their bioequivalence and tolerability. METHODS: This single-dose, open-label, randomized-sequence, 2-period crossover bioequivalence study was conducted on healthy Chinese volunteers aged 18 to 45 years. Subjects received a single 0.5 g dose of calcium dobesilate capsule under fasting or fed conditions, with a 3-day washout period between doses of the test (T) and reference (R) formulations. Blood samples were collected before and up to 24 hours after administration. The plasma concentration of calcium dobesilate was determined by a validated Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. Non-compartmental analysis was applied to identify the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties. The primary PK parameters including the maximal plasma concentration (Cmax), the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-t), and the AUC extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-inf) were used for bioequivalence evaluation. RESULTS: The mean of PK parameters for T and R capsules under fasting (fed) condition were: Cmax, 13.57 (6.71) and 12.59 (7.25) µg/mL; AUC0-t, 97.32 (79.74) and 96.97 (80.71) h*µg/mL; AUC0-inf, 101.68 (88.01) and 101.64 (87.81) h*µg/mL. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of GMRs under fasting (fed) condition were: Cmax, 97.91%-116.62% (88.63%-96.53%); AUC0-t, 97.15%-104.00% (96.58%-101.39%); and AUC0-inf, 97.19%-102.89% (98.67%-103.99%). These 90% CIs were all within the bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. All adverse events were mild. CONCLUSION: In this study, the T calcium dobesilate 0.5 g capsule was bioequivalent to the reference product under both fasting and fed conditions. Taking food would slow down its rate and reduce its amount of absorption. Both formulations were generally well tolerated.

Bioequivalence Study of Ezetimibe Tablets After a Single Oral Dose of 10 mg in Healthy Japanese Subjects Under Fasting Conditions.

This study compared the pharmacokinetic and safety profiles between a new generic and a branded reference product of 10-mg ezetimibe (EZE) tablets in 24 healthy Japanese male volunteers under fasting conditions, obtaining sufficient evidence for the marketing approval of the new generic product. The bioequivalence study was conducted with an open-label, 2 × 2, single-dose, crossover design in which the test and reference products were administered to volunteers after fasting for ≥10 hours. Blood samples were collected 24 times before to 72 hours after the administration of the investigational drug. We evaluated the peak drug concentration and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve up to the last measured concentration of EZE, EZEG, and total EZE (EZE + ezetimibe glucuronide [EZEG]). The 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios for peak drug concentration and area under the plasma concentration-time curve up to the last measured concentration of the test and reference products fell within the bioequivalence limits of 0.80 to 1.25 for EZE, EZEG, and total EZE. The test and reference products were well tolerated, and no adverse events occurred during the study. The test product was bioequivalent to the reference product.

Generic Medicinal Products in Immunosuppressive Therapy-Should It be a Challenge for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring?

ABSTRACT: Immunosuppressants have a narrow therapeutic index (NTIDs). Indisputably cyclosporine, tacrolimus, everolimus, and sirolimus have NTIDs, and only in the case of mycophenolic acid, a scientific discussion has not been yet concluded. Their specificities highlight the implications for generics introduced into the drug market, more precisely, with bioequivalence testing. In the European Union, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) released the "Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence." The bioequivalence (BE) of the generic (tested, T) versus original (reference, R) product should be confirmed by obtaining a 90% confidence interval (CI) for the T:R ratio of each of the 2 decisive pharmacokinetic parameters, namely, the area under the curve (AUC) between 90.00% and 111.11%. A similar approach (90.00%-112.00%) for AUC was adopted by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) for NTIDs; however, the US Food and Drug Administration is still based on classic acceptance criteria: 90% CI between 80.00% and 125.00% but with special requirements of BE testing. A discussion about long-expected global consensus was performed in this study based on the literature concerning BE testing in the case of NTIDs. The narrow acceptance criteria reduce the potential mean difference in bioavailability between generic and original products by a few percent. To identify this problem, special attention has been paid to switching drugs (generic-generic, original-generic) and therapeutic drug monitoring after conversion (TDM). There is no global consensus on the acceptance criteria for the BE of generic drugs; therefore, consensus and harmonization are strictly necessary. This study presents a review of the generic drug market and its classification by manufacturers, drug agencies, and dates of marketing authorization. Guidelines for TDM optimization (during switching/conversion) have been proposed. Physicians and clinical pharmacists should pay special attention to switching immunosuppressive drugs between original versus generic formulations, and generic versus generic formulations. Patients and their families should be educated on the risks associated with uncontrolled conversion.

Mechanistic modeling of ophthalmic, nasal, injectable, and implant generic drug products: A workshop summary report.

For approval, a proposed generic drug product must demonstrate it is bioequivalent (BE) to the reference listed drug product. For locally acting drug products, conventional BE approaches may not be feasible because measurements in local tissues at the sites of action are often impractical, unethical, or cost-prohibitive. Mechanistic modeling approaches, such as physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling, may integrate information from drug product properties and human physiology to predict drug concentrations in these local tissues. This may allow clinical relevance determination of critical drug product attributes for BE assessment during the development of generic drug products. In this regard, the Office of Generic Drugs of the US Food and Drug Administration has recently established scientific research programs to accelerate the development and assessment of generic products by utilizing model-integrated alternative BE approaches. This report summarizes the presentations and panel discussion from a public workshop that provided research updates and information on the current state of the use of PBPK modeling approaches to support generic product development for ophthalmic, injectable, nasal, and implant drug products.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of dasatinib and its generic: a phase I bioequivalence study in healthy Chinese subjects.

BACKGROUND: Dasatinib (Sprycel®) is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor for treating chronic myeloid leukemia and Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS: We designed a clinical study to demonstrate that the dasatinib tablet (YiNiShu®) (Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd) and Dasatinib (Bristol Myers Squibb) were bioequivalent under fasting and fed conditions. The whole study was structured into the fasting trial and the postprandial trial. Each period, subjects were given 50 mg dasatinib or its generic. The RSABE (reference scale average bioequivalence) and ABE (average bioequivalence) methods were employed to assess bioequivalence by pharmacokinetics (PK) parameters for a highly variable drug. RESULTS: 32 and 24 eligible volunteers were enrolled in the fasting and postprandial trials, respectively. In the fasting trial, the RSABE method was performed, and point estimates of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ met the bioequivalence criteria. In the postprandial trial, the ABE method was performed, and the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio (GMR) for PK parameters met the requirements of bioequivalence standards. CONCLUSION: The results proved that the PK parameters of the two drugs were similar and bioequivalent, indicating that both drugs had a good safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Number: NCT05640804) and Drug Clinical Trial Registration and Information Disclosure Platform (Number: CTR20181708).

A Bioequivalence Study With Pharmacokinetic Endpoints for Azithromycin Eye Drops.

Azithromycin eye drops with a bioadhesive ocular drug-delivery system can offer a simplified dosing regimen. In this study, we compared the pharmacokinetic properties and assessed the bioequivalence of a newly developed generic azithromycin eye drop with a branded formulation. This open-label, single-dose, randomized, crossover, sparse-sampling ocular bioequivalence study was conducted on 48 healthy Chinese volunteers. Tear samples were collected for up to 36 hours, and each participant was randomly allocated to one of the prespecified sampling times. Tear drug concentrations were determined using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated via noncompartmental analysis. A nonparametric bootstrap method was used to obtain 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of the test and reference drugs. Tolerability was evaluated for adverse events (AEs). After bootstrapping (1000 iterations), the 90%CIs for the log-transformed ratios of Cmax , AUC0-t , and AUC0-∞ were within the acceptable bioequivalence range (80%-125%). No moderate-to-severe AEs were reported for either formulation. Bioequivalence was demonstrated between the two formulations. The sparse-sampling design with the bootstrapping technique is promising for bioequivalence studies of topical ophthalmic drugs.

Regulatory utility of mechanistic modeling to support alternative bioequivalence approaches: A workshop overview.

On September 30 and October 1, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Center for Research on Complex Generics cosponsored a live virtual workshop titled "Regulatory Utility of Mechanistic Modeling to Support Alternative Bioequivalence Approaches." The overall aims of the workshop included (i) engaging the generic drug industry and other involved stakeholders regarding how mechanistic modeling and simulation can support their product development and regulatory submissions; (ii) sharing the current state of mechanistic modeling for bioequivalence (BE) assessment through case studies; (iii) establishing a consensus on best practices for using mechanistic modeling approaches, such as physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling and computational fluid dynamics modeling, for BE assessment; and (iv) introducing the concept of a Model Master File to improve model sharing between model developers, industry, and the FDA. More than 1500 people registered for the workshop. Based on a postworkshop survey, the majority of participants reported that their fundamental scientific understanding of mechanistic models was enhanced, there was greater consensus on model validation and verification, and regulatory expectations for mechanistic modeling submitted in abbreviated new drug applications were clarified by the workshop.

Generic lamotrigine extended-release tablets are bioequivalent to innovator drug in fully replicated crossover bioequivalence study.

OBJECTIVE: Lamotrigine is a commonly prescribed antiepileptic drug. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-funded clinical studies have demonstrated bioequivalence (BE) for generic lamotrigine immediate-release (IR) products in epilepsy patients with generic substitution. To address the potential concerns about the risk of generic-brand substitution of lamotrigine extended-release (ER) products, considering the complexity of controlled release systems and pharmacokinetic variations associated with possible within-subject variability (WSV), this prospective study assessed (1) BE of generic and brand lamotrigine ER products in a fully replicated BE study design in healthy subjects and (2) whether such fully replicated study design and WSV data can better support the approval of generic lamotrigine ER products. METHODS: This open-label, single-dose, two-treatment, four-period, two-sequence, fully replicated crossover BE study compared generic lamotrigine ER tablet to brand Lamictal XR (200 mg) in 30 healthy subjects under fed conditions. Pharmacokinetics (PK) profiles were generated based on intensive blood sampling up to 144 h. RESULTS: The two products showed comparable peak plasma concentration (Cmax ), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to the last measurable time point (AUC0-t ) and AUC extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-inf ), whereas median time to Cmax (Tmax ) values differed, that is, 10 h for generic and 22 h for brand products, respectively. WSVs for PK metrics were small (~8% of Cmax and ~6% of AUC) and similar between these two products. PK simulation predicted equivalent PK measurements of both products at steady state and after brand-to-generic switch, except the first day upon switching. No serious adverse events were reported. SIGNIFICANCE: The generic lamotrigine ER tablet product demonstrates BE to the brand product in a fully replicated BE study design with healthy subjects, supporting the adequacy of the two-way crossover study design to demonstrate BE and generic-brand substitution of lamotrigine ER products.

Bioequivalence and safety evaluation of two preparations of metformin hydrochloride sustained-release tablets (Boke® and Glucophage®-XR) in healthy Chinese volunteers: a randomized phase I clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: As per the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) requirements, the quality and efficacy of generic drugs must be consistent with those of the innovator drug. We aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence and safety of generic metformin hydrochloride sustained-release (MH-SR) tablets (Boke®) developed by Beijing Wanhui Double-crane Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., China and the innovator product metformin hydrochloride extended-release tablets (Glucophage®-XR) manufactured by Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, New York, NY, in healthy Chinese volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a bioequivalence and safety assessment of MH-SR (500 mg/tablet) and Glucophage®-XR (500 mg/tablet) tablets in a randomized, open-label, two-period, two-sequence crossover, single-dose oral study in 48 healthy Chinese adult participants under fasting conditions (Chinese Clinical Trial Registration No. CTR20171306). The washout period was seven days. Bioequivalence (80.00-125.00%) was assessed using adjusted geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the area under the curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) for each component. RESULTS: The 90% CIs of the test/reference preparation for key pharmacokinetic parameters were 97.36-108.30% for AUC0→t, 97.26-108.09% for AUC0→∞ and 96.76-111.37% for Cmax. No severe adverse events (AEs) were observed. However, 38 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurred, including metabolic or nutritional conditions (n = 8), infections (n = 2), gastrointestinal conditions (n = 10) and abnormal inspection (n = 18). No significant difference was observed between MH-SR (23 ADRs, 10 participants) and Glucophage®-XR (15 ADRs, 12 participants) (p = .500). Bioequivalence was concluded since the 90% CIs of the main pharmacokinetic parameters were within the equivalence interval (80.00-125.00%). CONCLUSIONS: MH-SR (500 mg/tablet) and Glucophage®-XR (500 mg/tablet) were found to be bioequivalent and safe under fasting conditions in healthy Chinese participants. Thus, the market demand for MH-SR tablets (500 mg/tablet) can be met using the generic alternative.KEY MESSAGESGeneric MH-SR tablets (500 mg, Beijing Wanhui Double-crane Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Beijing, China) and innovator MH-SR tablets (Glucophage®-XR, 500 mg, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, New York, NY, USA) were bioequivalent and safe in healthy Chinese volunteers under single-dose administration and fasting conditions.The main goal of this study is to support an increase in the supply of MH-SR tablets in China by proving the efficacy and safety of a generic alternative.Although no sugar was administered in the BE trial of the MH-SR tablets under fasting conditions, no hypoglycaemic event occurred. The method used in this study is expected to serve as a reference for BE studies of different MH-SR formulations.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation and relative bioavailability pilot study of fidaxomicin in healthy Chinese subjects: An open, randomized, single-dose, cross-over study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics, investigate relative bioavailability, and provide data for potential additional bioequivalence trials between generic fidaxomicin (test (T) formulation) and the original brand (reference (R) formulation) in healthy Chinese subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An open, randomized, single-dose, cross-over study was conducted in 18 healthy Chinese subjects. The subjects randomly received T or R formulations and the alternative formulations were received after a 14-day wash-out period. Blood and fecal samples were collected and tested by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). PK parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental model. Relative bioavailability considering commonly established bioequivalence criteria was assessed. RESULTS: Cmax were 3.58 ± 2.74 ng/mL and 6.01 ± 3.93 ng/mL, and AUC0-∞ were 35.71 ± 18.68 h×ng/mL and 52.15 ± 31.31 h×ng/mL for the T and R formulations, respectively. The tmax of both formulations was 5.00 hours. The cumulative fecal excretion rate (Fe0-96h/F) of fidaxomicin and its main active metabolite OP-1118 were similar for both formulations. The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CI) of AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were not completely within the range of 80.00 - 125.00%. Significant within-subject and inter-subject coefficients of variation (> 30%) were found. CONCLUSION: Despite the differences in exposure, PK characteristics and fecal recovery of the two formulations were similar, suggesting that an effective concentration of the generic fidaxomicin could be achieved locally in the gastrointestinal tract. Fidaxomicin was a highly viable drug, thus providing reference for future clinical study design.

Pharmacokinetics, Bioequivalence, and Safety Studies of a Generic Selective Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Nilotinib Capsule Versus a Branded Product in Healthy Chinese Volunteers.

Nilotinib, a second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has been approved in the United States and Europe as a treatment for patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML)-chronic phase (CP) and patients with CML-CP or chronic myeloid leukemia-accelerated phase (CML-AP) who are resistant or intolerant to imatinib (a first-generation TKI). This study compared the bioequivalence and safety of the test nilotinib capsule and reference nilotinib capsule (Tasigna, Novartis) in healthy Chinese volunteers under fasting conditions for marketing authorization in China. The results of the study are reported for the first time. This was a single-dose, randomized, open-label, two-period, and cross-over study. Thirty healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of a 200-mg test or reference capsule under fasting conditions in each period with a 10-day washout. Plasma samples were analyzed with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated with WinNonlin software. The geometric mean ratio and the corresponding 90% confidence intervals of Cmax , AUC0-t , and AUC0-∞ for nilotinib between the two fixed-dose combination formulations were within the bioequivalence acceptance range of 80%-125%, therefore the generic and branded formulations were bioequivalent in healthy Chinese volunteers.

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of a Generic and a Branded Pazopanib Tablet in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

This study aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of two pazopanib tablet formulations in healthy Chinese subjects. A randomized, open-label, single-dose, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study was conducted under fasting conditions. A total of 32 eligible subjects were randomly administered a single dose of a 200-mg generic or branded pazopanib tablet with a 16-day washout period. Blood samples were collected before and up to 72 hours after dosing. Pharmacokinetic parameters were analyzed with noncompartmental analysis. Safety assessments included physical examinations, laboratory tests, and adverse events reporting. Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-t ), and AUC from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) were similar between the generic and branded products (all P > .05). The 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratio of the test/reference products for Cmax , AUC0-t , and AUC0-∞ were 89.1%-117.1%, 81.9%-108.5%, and 82.4%-109.6%, respectively. There were no serious adverse events during the study. The newly developed generic pazopanib tablet was bioequivalent to the reference product under fasting conditions. Both formulations were well tolerated in healthy Chinese volunteers.

Considerations for the Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second-Based Comparative Clinical Endpoint Bioequivalence Studies for Orally Inhaled Drug Products.

Herein, we present the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Research and Standards' current thinking, challenges, and opportunities for comparative clinical endpoint bioequivalence (BE) studies of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs). Given the product-associated complexities of OIDPs, the FDA currently uses an aggregate weight-of-evidence approach to demonstrate that a generic OIDP is bioequivalent to its reference listed drug. The approach utilizes comparative clinical endpoint BE or pharmacodynamic BE studies, pharmacokinetic BE studies, and in vitro BE studies to demonstrate equivalence, in addition to formulation sameness and device similarity. For the comparative clinical endpoint BE studies, metrics based on forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1 ) are often the recommended clinical endpoints. However, the use of FEV1 can pose a challenge due to its large variability and a relatively flat dose-response relationship for most OIDPs. The utility of applying dose-scale analysis was also investigated by the FDA but often not recommended, due to either flat dose-response relationships or insufficient clinical study data. As a potential way to reduce sample size, we found adapting covariate analysis only explained a limited portion of the variation based on further investigation. The FDA continues to develop alternative methods to make BE assessment of OIDPs more cost- and time-efficient. Prospective generic drug applicants and academia are encouraged to participate in this effort by proposing new approaches in pre-abbreviated new drug application meeting requests and collaborating in the form of grants and contracts under the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments (GDUFA) Regulatory Science and Research Program.

Flux-Based Formulation Development-A Proof of Concept Study.

The work aimed to develop the Absorption Driven Drug Formulation (ADDF) concept, which is a new approach in formulation development to ensure that the drug product meets the expected absorption rate. The concept is built on the solubility-permeability interplay and the rate of supersaturation as the driving force of absorption. This paper presents the first case study using the ADDF concept where not only dissolution and solubility but also permeation of the drug is considered in every step of the formulation development. For that reason, parallel artificial membrane permeability assay (PAMPA) was used for excipient selection, small volume dissolution-permeation apparatus was used for testing amorphous solid dispersions (ASDs), and large volume dissolution-permeation tests were carried out to characterize the final dosage forms. The API-excipient interaction studies on PAMPA indicated differences when different fillers or surfactants were studied. These differences were then confirmed with small volume dissolution-permeation assays where the addition of Tween 80 to the ASDs decreased the flux dramatically. Also, the early indication of sorbitol's advantage over mannitol by PAMPA has been confirmed in the investigation of the final dosage forms by large-scale dissolution-permeation tests. This difference between the fillers was observed in vivo as well. The presented case study demonstrated that the ADDF concept opens a new perspective in generic formulation development using fast and cost-effective flux-based screening methods in order to meet the bioequivalence criteria. Graphical Abstract.

Pharmacokinetics, Bioequivalence, and Safety Studies of Amlodipine Besylate in Healthy Subjects.

This study aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of 2 amlodipine besylate tablet formulations, a generic formulation and an original formulation, and to investigate their pharmacokinetic and safety profiles. This study was designed as a randomized, open-label, single-dose, crossover, dual-period study and was divided into fasting and postprandial human bioequivalence trials. In the first trial after overnight fasting, 28 subjects were given 5-mg amlodipine besylate tablets via oral administration, and blood specimens were obtained up to 144 hours after dosing; another 28 subjects had a high-fat meal 1 hour before drug administration and proceeded the same as the fasting trial. Bioequivalence was evaluated using 90%CIs for the ratio test/reference of log area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, log AUC from time 0 to infinity, and log peak concentration. The plasma concentrations were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The safety was assessed throughout the study. The results show that no significant differences were observed between the pharmacokinetic profiles of the test and reference amlodipine besylate tablets in the fasting and postprandial trials. The 90%CIs of the peak concentration, AUC from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration and AUC from time 0 to infinity of amlodipine in the 2 trials were within the commonly accepted bioequivalence criteria of 80% to 125%. Compared with the pharmacokinetic parameters of the fasting and postprandial trials, food had no significant effect on exposure of amlodipine besylate. There was no significant difference in safety statistical results between the 2 groups. The results suggest that generic and original amlodipine besylate tablets are bioequivalent with similar safety profiles.